Roe v. Wade getting overturned!!

[whutTHEYsay]

No no. I have been quite clear. Life begins at conception. That is just a scientific fact.
At that instant, a genetically unique human life has been produced.

I have never argued that there is not a unique human life created at conception.

 

[BackAgain]

I have never argued that there is not a unique human life created at conception.

So? Why superimpose irrelevancies over that fact?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

So? Why superimpose irrelevancies over that fact?

Common law in our legal system is not an irrelevancy. Life does not begin at conception in common law. When you say, common law is irrelevant, you are a liar.

 

[BackAgain]

Common law in our legal system is not an irrelevancy. Life does not begin at conception in common law. When you say, common law is irrelevant, you are a liar.

No you babbling jerkwad. You insist on missing the point.

I haven’t addressed the law.

So you’re wrong as well as a pissant.

I have consistently only advised you of when life begins. And I have noted that our hierarchy of values places life at the pinnacle. Therefore, abortion should generally be illegal. That’s it. And I have said it is.

You moron.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

BackAgain230318-#7,744 I haven’t addressed the {Common Law - default basis for all law }

NFBW: That is the point BackAgain . You can’t address the fact that we are addressing human life in the form of a fetus as a matter of making laws and protecting the rights of the mother.

You and white Trump Christian group anti-choice thinkers cannot address the issue of abortion beyond the undisputed reality that biological life begins at conception. No shit!!! on that. Jesus Christ you all have a keen sense of the obvious but no sense of law.

Ding220718-#2,388 A new genetically distinct human being comes into existence at conception

ding 220718-#2,403 This is pretty simple. It's a scientific fact that human life begins at conception. I have provided ample scientific testimony to this and you have provided none to dispute it.

NFBW: Why would I dispute a scientific fact ding that I believe is factual based on common sense alone.

BackAgain221128-#5,932 Leftards deny that it is akin to murder by denying that it is a unique human life.

BackAgain230318-#7,739 {re: conception} At that instant, a genetically unique human life has been produced.

NFBW: I do not deny that a genetically unique human life is produced at conception.

It is time you address Common Law in effect when our secular Constitution was inked.

END2303182030

 

[beagle9]

No you babbling jerkwad. You insist on missing the point.

I haven’t addressed the law.

So you’re wrong as well as a pissant.

I have consistently only advised you of when life begins. And I have noted that our hierarchy of values places life at the pinnacle. Therefore, abortion should generally be illegal. That’s it. And I have said it is.

You moron.

He won't stop, because it's possible that he's trying to get to something else by way of the abortion issue. Hmmmm. Otherwise if he fails, then possibly he's worried about a Domino effect.. Hmmm.

Think about it, he's put to much into it to be worried about a woman retaining some sort of perceived right to kill her unborn baby without intervention, and this regardless of how sickening the situation gets. Hmmmm.

 

[BackAgain]

BackAgain230318-#7,744 I haven’t addressed the {Common Law - default basis for all law }

NFBW: That is the point BackAgain . You can’t address the fact that we are addressing human life in the form of a fetus as a matter of making laws and protecting the rights of the mother.

You and white Trump Christian group anti-choice thinkers cannot address the issue of abortion beyond the undisputed reality that biological life begins at conception. No shit!!! on that. Jesus Christ you all have a keen sense of the obvious but no sense of law.

Ding220718-#2,388 A new genetically distinct human being comes into existence at conception

ding 220718-#2,403 This is pretty simple. It's a scientific fact that human life begins at conception. I have provided ample scientific testimony to this and you have provided none to dispute it.

NFBW: Why would I dispute a scientific fact ding that I believe is factual based on common sense alone.

BackAgain221128-#5,932 Leftards deny that it is akin to murder by denying that it is a unique human life.

BackAgain230318-#7,739 {re: conception} At that instant, a genetically unique human life has been produced.

NFBW: I do not deny that a genetically unique human life is produced at conception.

It is time you address Common Law in effect when our secular Constitution was inked.

END2303182030

You remain sullen, stupid and sophomoric.

Life begins at conception. This is a fact.

Our society has a hierarchy of values. This is also a fact.

In that hierarchy of values, life is the preeminent value as logic says it has to be since, without life, it self, no other rights can be enjoyed.

Therefore all of your twaddle about common law is quite beside the point.

Abortion terminates a unique individual human life.

Absent extenuating circumstances, abortion ought to be outlawed.

This doesn’t depend on common law or on any “stage” of development. Indeed, that latter set of arguments is illogical. You don’t get your adult teeth until after your baby teeth fall out. There’s a stage of human development for you. Why should it not be ok to therefore just snuff out the life of any child until their adult teeth come in?

Pretty random stage of development. But so are all the others you point to. None of them change the fact that life has already begun.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Therefore all of your twaddle about common law is quite beside the point.

Are we talking about making laws dealing with the medical practice of abortion or aren’t we?

 

[BackAgain]

Are we talking about making laws dealing with the medical practice of abortion or aren’t we?

I was.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

NFBW230318-#7,748 to: -1 “Are we talking about making laws dealing with the medical practice of abortion or aren’t we?”

BackAgain230318-#7,749 to: -1 “I was.”

NFBW: If you are talking about making laws that ban abortion and overturn Roe v Wade why did you say you didn’t address it?

BackAgain230318-#7,744 • I haven’t addressed the law.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

NFBW230318-#7,745 • It is time you address Common Law in effect when our secular Constitution was inked.

BackAgain230318-#7,747 to: -2 Why should it not be ok to therefore just snuff out the life of any child until their adult teeth come in?

NFBW: If you asked your question BackAgain in a court of law you would be told quite explicitly that the live birth requirement according to Lord Coke’s “born alive” rules is the common law for quickened fetuses, and states it is not homicide for in law “it is accounted a reasonable creature in rerum natura when it is born alive” in the nature of things, The born alive rule was applied in the U.S. as early as 1791

It is not be ok to therefore just snuff out the life of any burn alive child until their adult teeth come in? After every second that passed beyond childbirth “is homicide in common law - bringing up adult teeth” was very stupid of you.

END2302190217

 

[BackAgain]

NFBW230318-#7,745 • It is time you address Common Law in effect when our secular Constitution was inked.

BackAgain230318-#7,747 to: -2 Why should it not be ok to therefore just snuff out the life of any child until their adult teeth come in?

NFBW: If you asked your question BackAgain in a court of law you would be told quite explicitly that the live birth requirement according to Lord Coke’s “born alive” rules is the common law for quickened fetuses, and states it is not homicide for in law “it is accounted a reasonable creature in rerum natura when it is born alive” in the nature of things, The born alive rule was applied in the U.S. as early as 1791

It is not be ok to therefore just snuff out the life of any burn alive child until their adult teeth come in? After every second that passed beyond childbirth “is homicide in common law - bringing up adult teeth” was very stupid of you.

END2302190217

Damn, you are ponderous. And dense? Wow. You’re dense enough to cause the black hole that sucked out your brains.

And again. With no respect, your posting style blows chunks.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

BackAgain230318-#7,747 to: -2 Why should it not be ok to therefore just snuff out the life of any child until their adult teeth come in?

NFBW: Common Law sez it is not ever ok to just snuff out the life of any “born alive” child until their adult teeth come in? That has been homicide for centuries.

BackAgain has a serious flaw in the foolish logic regarding adult teeth.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

BackAgain230318-#7,747 to: -2 Why should it not be ok to therefore just snuff out the life of any child until their adult teeth come in?

NFBW230318-#7,753 to: -6 Common Law sez it is not ever ok to just snuff out the life of any “born alive” child until their adult teeth come in? That has been homicide for centuries.

BackAgain230318-#7,747 to: -2 In that hierarchy of values, life is the preeminent value as logic says it has to be since, without life, it self, no other rights can be enjoyed.

NFBW: In the hierarchy of values enshrined in Common Law, life is the preeminent value from the moment life has been “born alive” not before. BackAgain has a second flaw in logic from post 7747 in that his legal definition of life from a moment of conception is not a result of logic organized under centuries of legal judgments and case law. It is rather a result of his conscience absorbed similarly deep into the conscience of the Republican Party’s group mostly-white-Christian think’s drift into theological autocracy without being religious himself.

END2303190400

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Monk-Eye2300318-#7,736 to: -42 As a live birth is required to be a citizen , by equitable doctrine a live birth is required for equal protection with a citizen .

BackAgain230318-#7,737 to: -1 Life begins at conception. Our society values life. It is the highest value since, without life itself, no other rights can possibly exist.

NFBW: When you proclaim BackAgain that “our society values life” is it mandatory that all persons who meet the live birth requirement and are capable of intellectually consuming information about being a member of society as a reasonable and rational human being, must we all including Monk-Eye accept your definition of life as absolute truth with no deviation allowed?

END2303190508

 

[whutTHEYsay]

K9Buck210625-#366 • K9Buck • “Leftists, like their master Satan, love abortion.” 230319^a

NFBW: How do you know our beloved by nine out of ten, if not all, black American Christians that president Joe Biden, as you say K9Buck , loves abortion? Can you divulge the source from which you claim that Biden loves termination of a human life in the womb.

END2303190931

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Arrogance Of Traitorous Simpletons Pretending To Express Something New "

* Short Sighted Goofy Nonsense *

Wrong. Life begins at conception.

Life began a long time ago and its continuation is not determined or guaranteed .

The meaning of an afterlife is to pass on ones genetic identity , in perpetuity , so that another , both figuratively and literally as ones self , may have an opportunity to experience sentience and sapience through a required sophisticated physical state that is otherwise described as life , where failure to do so in perpetuity is ascribed the metaphors of final judgement or eternal damnation .


* Sedition Promoted By Sanctimonious Anthropocentric Psychopaths *

Our society values life. It is the highest value since, without life itself, no other rights can possibly exist.

Then your society is an institution of traitors to us republic credo of e pluribus unum .

A wright exists because there is an entity capable of issuing a retort , or reprise , for a violation of its precepts , and there is no such a thing as an inalienable wright to life within nature .

A state is comprised of citizens , for which a state interest exists and without which a state does not exists , wherefore a citizen and its constitutional protections are instantiated with a live birth requirement and , by equitable doctrine , a live birth is required for equal protection with a citizen Q.E.D .


* Gluttonous Apex Predator Arrogance *

And citizenship isn’t the basis upon which we guarantee the right to life, anyway.

Equal protection with a citizen requires live birth , logically , of course .


* Easily Referenced Tactical Revision Of Moronic Diction *

Says monk without any support. And the word is “right.” Your predilection for using a similar word is stupid of you.

Roe v. Wade getting overturned!!

" Pro-Choice Republican Says Fuck The Queen of Spain And Her Knights Of Columbus Fucktards " * Stupid Is As Stupid Does * I joined this forum August 30, 2008. Posted this September 6th... https://www.usmessageboard.com/threads/poll-would-you-prefered-to-have-been-aborted.57689/#post-769991...

www.usmessageboard.com

* Pathetic Pleadings With Veracious Canines By Damned Dirty Apes *

The word is “right.” Not “wright.” And a death penalty is a penalty whereby a right is forfeited after a determination of guilt. The right to life is designed to protect innocent life.

The term wright is correct and the term right , more succinctly referred to as a norm , is pretentious nonsense .

A zygote , embryo , fetus has not met a live birth requirement to receive equal protection with a citizen , that would include a wright to life , and any sentenced to death has had its wright to life removed , albeit by equitable doctrine for having removed a wright to life on another , upon which they are subject to natural freedoms of moral relativism that exists in nature .


* States Prohibited From Protecting A Wright To Life Without A Live Birth Requirement *

The ones seeking abortion on demand couch it in terms of their alleged “right” to have an abortion. They call it choice. They tend to insist that they have absolute control over their own bodies disregarding entirely the unique other life inside the mother’s body. They call it choice. Well, newsflash: if I choose to murder a neighbor, I don’t have any legal right to make that choice or perform that deed.
You are in full babble mode. I wonder if you have dementia.

Your neophyte deductions and vast over generalizations are logical fallacies of babbling nonsense .


* Ridiculous Comedy Goad *

Try to use your insignificant little brain to follow along. I have never argues that a mother never has a claim to seeking an abortion when and if her life is in peril due to the pregnancy or a birth. I also don’t claim that society can or should deny her an abortion if the preborn human life inside her is the product of a rape or incest. It may be tragic, but the innocent life inside her may have to be forfeited under such circumstances.

Please stop blubbering about innocence , the ignorance of its pretenses makes me laugh too hard .

The success criteria of nature to survive has not changed and rewarding a rapist with an afterlife because some lunar tick ( sin mythology ) cracked pots with melodramatic overinflated sense of self worth cannot escape their delusions of grandeur is as stupid as it gets .


* Dullard Conclusions Pretending Equal Protection With A Citizen Posits Must Be A Citizen *

My argument and the argument of pro-life advocates is that, absent such compelling circumstances, the innocent preborn life deserves protection. That right to life isn’t predicated on citizenship or post birth “personhood” status. It is predicated on the fact that preborn or not, the life is a life.

The etymology of the term person implies , " per " as in countable by census and hence born , and " son " meaning male .

That is , all persons born or naturalized implies that by etymology , women are not citizens of us republic , see us 19th amendment .

US declaration of independence relates that " all men are created equal " that surreptitiously implies that women are not equal with men and a correction of the vernacular means the term person would be replace by the term individual .


* Horror Genre Freaks Want Them In The Circus To Feel Superior *

 

[BackAgain]

BackAgain230318-#7,747 to: -2 Why should it not be ok to therefore just snuff out the life of any child until their adult teeth come in?

NFBW: Common Law sez it is not ever ok to just snuff out the life of any “born alive” child until their adult teeth come in? That has been homicide for centuries.

BackAgain has a serious flaw in the foolish logic regarding adult teeth.

Wrong. It’s a perfectly valid point which a moron like the grunting FoolForLife can’t comprehend. FOOL has consistently pointed to various “stages of development” to determine when it’s ok to snuff out a unique innocent human life. Well, stupid asshole FOOL doesn’t grasp that adult teeth marks a stage in the development of that life.

Arbitrary? Yes! Just as are the ones he points to.

Also, Fool still can’t handle the quote function. What a tool is our petty little FOOL.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Also, Fool still can’t handle the quote function. What a tool is our petty little FOOL.

You are a liar. Once a liar always a liar.

I am using a quote function that works best for research purposes for me. So suck it up and keep the conversation devoid of your childish insults and bitching about format and typos. Show us you have reason logic an facts and integrity of the mind that god gave you at some point between live birth and conception in the natural order of things.

Do you think Daniel Webster was a founding father of a Christian Nation?

 

[BackAgain]

" Arrogance Of Traitorous Simpletons Pretending To Express Something New "

* Short Sighted Goofy Nonsense *

Life began a long time ago and its continuation is not determined or guaranteed .

I don’t know how old you are. But your life began a relatively short time ago. You are playing pointless word games. We aren’t discussing the initial development of life on Earth, monkey. We are discussing when the individual unique human life starts. That is at conception. Period.

The meaning of an afterlife is to pass on ones genetic identity , in perpetuity , so that another , both figuratively and literally as ones self , may have an opportunity to experience sentience and sapience through a required sophisticated physical state that is otherwise described as life , where failure to do so in perpetuity is ascribed the metaphors of final judgement or eternal damnation .

Sure. That’s what “the” meaning of afterlife is.

Your verbosity is worsened by your insistence on using the word “wright” for “right.” Simpleminded crap like that make your posts both pointless and irrational.